U-I-260/04

Reference no.:
U-I-260/04
Objavljeno:
Official Gazette RS, No. 45/2007 and OdlUS XVI, 25 | 20.04.2007
ECLI:
ECLI:SI:USRS:2007:U.I.260.04
Abstract:
Interest on bonds which entitled persons receive as compensation for damage in accordance with the Denationalization Act, is not a part of the compensation for nationalized property to which the persons entitled to denationalization are entitled under this Act, but is income which is paid to persons entitled to denationalization by means of bonds as securities. Therefore, the taxation of such interest does not entail an interference with the property of persons entitled to denationalization. Due to the fact that according to the Constitution taxes are a constituent part of the content of a property right, the taxation of an income does not in itself entail an interference with the constitutionally protected right to property.
 
The legislature had an objective reason, justified in the prevailing public interest, to regulate taxation which was not determined by the regulation previously in force, and therefore its interference with the principle of the protection of trust in the law, as one of the principles of a state governed by the rule of law determined in Article 2 of the Constitution, was constitutionally admissible. The taxation of interest on bonds which the entitled persons receive as compensation from denationalization, does not have retroactive effect as it only applies to interest which was (or will be) calculated after the commencement of the application of the challenged regulation (i.e. after 1 January 2005).
 
Regarding the fact that interest on bonds which the entitled persons receive as compensation in accordance with the Denationalization Act, is income from property, the legal position of the holders of such bonds as regards the taxation of interest from such bonds does not differ from the legal position of holders of other debt securities. Therefore, the legislature did not act contrary to the second paragraph of Article 14 of the Constitution as it determined the payment of a personal income tax also on interest on bonds received from denationalization.
 
Regarding the fact that interest on bonds which the entitled persons receive as compensation in accordance with the Denationalization Act has the nature of income from property, it cannot be compared to default interest on damages awarded for damage to personal property determined by a judicial decision, and also not to damages for the inability to use property in the period from the entry into force of the Denationalization Act until the return of property in accordance with the Denationalization Act to which the persons entitled to denationalization to whom property was returned in kind are entitled.
 
Petitioners do not have legal interest if they do not demonstrate that the possible granting of a petition would lead to an improvement of their legal position.
Document in PDF:
Type of procedure:
review of constitutionality and legality of regulations and other general acts
Type of act:
statute
Date of application:
10.09.2004
Date of decision:
20.04.2007
Type of decision adopted:
decision
Outcome of proceedings:
establishment – it is not inconsistent with the Constitution/statute establishment – it is not inconsistent with the Constitution/statute rejection
Document:
AN02993